Ticket #53 (closed defect: fixed)

Opened 3 years ago

Last modified 11 months ago

if cabal get update needs to run, say so

Reported by: ijones Assigned to: ijones
Priority: normal Milestone: Cabal-1.4
Component: cabal-install tool Version:
Severity: major Keywords:
Cc: Difficulty: normal
GHC Version: 6.2.1 Platform: Linux

Description (Last modified by ijones) 

cabal-get -g install cabal-put
Using config dir: /home/ijones/.cabal-get
cabal-get: Couldn't satisfy dependency: 'cabal-put -any'.

the actual problem here is that the user needs to run cabal-get update.

Change History

01/23/06 21:50:56 changed by ijones

  • description changed.

01/23/06 21:51:04 changed by ijones

  • description changed.

01/23/06 21:56:57 changed by ijones

  • severity changed from normal to critical.

08/23/07 04:43:54 changed by duncan

  • platform set to Linux.
  • ghcversion set to 6.2.1.
  • component changed from cabal-get to cabal-install.

09/26/07 05:51:17 changed by duncan

  • milestone changed from Cabal-1.2 to Cabal-1.4.

Punt.

12/18/07 03:02:26 changed by duncan

This is actually a tricky problem. We cannot just go online any old time to update the index. We have to be able to fetch packages and install and re-install them later without having to go online.

So the question is, what are the points when we would have to go online anyway and so it'd be ok to update the index. Are there enough of them, or should we just suggest to update when the index is older than N days.

Can someone come up with a proposal?

01/12/08 10:04:07 changed by duncan

  • status changed from new to closed.
  • resolution set to fixed.

We currently get: 

$ cabal install cabal-upload
Warning: The package list does not exist. Run 'cabal update' to download it.
cabal: Unresolved dependencies: cabal-upload -any

I misunderstood the request. The original request was just to say when the package list is missing. I interpreted it as knowing to update the package list based on a request to install something that was on the server but not in the current package list, which is rather harder.

So closing this one as it's fixed. Though we could probably do better, it should be an error straight off rather than a warning followed by another error.